To be mad at FIL for feeding my daughter meat?

[Fruitypebbles]

Hi, just joined the site to ask this.

We're vegans, and my daughter has been raised and weaned vegan. She's 5 and happily eats anything put in front of her. She's very healthy, not lacking in any vitamins or nutrients at all and is beautiful, happy and refuses to eat meat usually because she knows in child friendly terms why we are vegans.

Despite her health being perfectly fine (she rarely ever gets ill, let alone any deficiencies in iron and protein - there's plenty of protein in plants!) my FIL thinks we're evil. We've given him all the information, shown him exactly how much she gets in a normal day and he can see how healthy she is. He fed her a meat casserole, she obviously couldn't recognise the meat in the stew because we use meat subs occasionally. She was very, very sick after this as her body can't digest meat after never eating it. Why can't he just respect our choices to not eat animal products? AIBU?

It's not about the diet it's about the fil ignoring parental instructions.

Grand parents have had there turn at being parents, when their children have children it's ok to advise but not take over and do the pole opposite.

They have a smaller impact because they are not being exploited on the same large scale. The more people switch to milk alternatives the bigger the environmental problem will become.

As wonderful as a first world vegan diet sounds it cannot provide for everyone who decided to switch from dairy. Intensive crop farming would have a lot bigger impact on the environment than it does today. We would be exactly where we are with modern dairy/meat farming.

The amount of crop used to feed livestock plus ourselves is enough to feed 10 billion people. If anything, less plants would be need to be farmed. And we wouldn't be farming animals. Win-win.

Cattle only need crops of they are fattened in feed lots. Like I said not used by us or any farmer in our region. We don't live in an intense agri business area. We don't have a niche little farm we just have a normal farm for our area and that method works for our region. Everyone eats local produce. It is quite possible to live like that, it's how the developing world rolls. If you want milk alternatives they will be seasonal, to make them available all the time they will need to be farmed intensively.
Feed lots mostly use crop residues to fatten up cattle. Humans don't eat crop residue.

Everyone? So I'm assuming the local supermarkets in your area doesn't bother to stock meat, eggs and dairy, then? Obviously they wouldn't because it'd never get bought.

You do not have to feed animals crops if you have animals that are adapted to live in that area. In some cases that means you can only have goats. If you want wool, in many places you need crops to supplement grass.

Sorry, I missed the point a little there although I would be interested in your answer as I've lived in rural, and currently a semi-rural area, and it's not like that. You may have more of insight into your personal experience of farming and animal agriculture but the studies do show that we produce enough crop to feed 133% (ish) of the population, and yes whilst this may mainly consist of corn and other cheap products, it can be relitively easily changed to produce the plants in demand for a vegan world. Coupled with the fact that we will no longer require the vast amount of land necessary to raise animals for food, we can easily use up less land resources to convert to a vegan diet. And of course, plants have less of an environmental impact than animals, producing less methane, Co2, and requiring less water, which will again help the environment.

We only have one supermarket but it's not a big chain store, just a family owned large shop about the size of a metro or local.
Of course they stock meat, eggs and dairy because not everyone has animais or farms. They stock seasonal fruit and local produce. Sometimes the owner can get stuff in for example he said he can get soya milk when I asked him on behalf of my vegan friend who is comng in July. Our nearest big city is 100 miles away and given the state of the road it takes 3 hours to get there.

You may have lived in a rural area, but I doubt it is comparable with what you are thinking of.

If we converted to a vegan diet we would no longer be able to live on only what is produced locally. We would no longer be self sufficient and would need to import foods from outside, the land used for cattle has hardy grass, much of it cannot be used for food without the use of pumped water, fertilisers and pesticides. As cleats rightly points out, in many places animals can adapt and live. Plants are less adaptable to high draught or poor soil. The majority of the worlds population live in rural areas of developing countries, so this is more like the reality of the situation rather than an exception.

What would happen to the animals, would we starve them or slaughter them all? How many could we leave? How many of each species? Where would they live?

Rather than everyone becoming vegan and continuing the level of over consumption, i think it would be far better if the first world consumed less and moved back into more local subsistence living.

That's really interesting Dizzy! I've not heard of anywhere like that before. With all the farms in your area, and excluding the ones with less than great conditions, do you think that they'd be able to provide animal products for everyone in your area, even if consumption was lessened? What about if you also had to export to neighbouring towns and villages, or even to supply for your nearest city?

And secondly, does it matter, when we don't have to at all? We use 70% of the world's water for livestock, and 33 million square km of land. Or about the equivalent to Africa. Yes, it's not great land, but using just a fraction of the amount of water used to raise animals for food could be switched into maintaining and recovering this land. An average of 40% of grain is used to feed livestock, and this rises to 70% in richer countries. We could, of course, simply use this land to feed ourselves. Food may have to be imported for countries that do struggle to find suitable land, but by taking advantage of what is grown in your part of the world, and seasonal, food could be transported across a continent as opposed to across the world. About 20% of green house gasses is used for animal agriculture, it's the biggest cause, compared to 13% for all transport put together. Any possible extra emissions for food transportation is still much lesser than our current emissions, and also if we switched to just local, seasonal food. Livestock is a gas bomb.

I don't want to focus on those in developing counties too much, as I know many won't have the money to buy food and have to rely on livestock to feed themselves and their family. Some simply have to manage.

Western countries don't, we can eat a full, complete diet, and not just without extra strain, but with less. And [[http://chartsbin.com/view/12730 when looking at this]] we would make the biggest impact. Something we need to do, because our planet can not sustain us. Even if we cut down consumption.

And this will of course, have a positive impact on our health.Women who eat meat are 3.8x more likely to get breast cancer and 3x more likely to get ovarian cancer than vegans. Men are 3.6x more likely to get prostate cancer. An Omni man has a 50% chance of a heart attack, compared to 15% for a vegan. By cutting out meat, a person has a 90% reduced chance of a heart attack.

Oh, and no animals have to die for us!

I asked that exact same question, about what will happen to the animals, on here and not too long ago. I was on the side you are. It wouldn't be an overnight switch, and we would simply slow down breeding to meet a lessening demand. When we no longer eat meat, I'm sure an ecologist would be able to see which animals would manage in the 'wild'. Sheep who do not shed their wool would struggle, for example. But with all the extra space we have I'm sure that a carefully selected amount of animals would be able to reach their own equilibrium.

What about if you also had to export to neighbouring towns and villages, or even to supply for your nearest city?

What makes you think we don't do this already? We supply the food locally, that doesn't mean that we don't also provide for the city but diary is very local, meat is usually taken further but not excessively so. The country I live in doesn't import food from outside. Even in the big cities it is rare to be able to buy say avocados in December or mangos in May. Kiwis are very rare, as are strawberries and cherries.

Are you aware of how much water you need for one almond or to grow brocolli? One almond needs 4 litres of water to grow. 100 almonds makes 1 litre of almond milk. So that's 400 litres of water used to make one litre of almond milk. A cow uses 3 litres of water to make a litre of milk!

Food may have to be imported for countries that do struggle to find suitable land, but by taking advantage of what is grown in your part of the world, and seasonal, food could be transported across a continent as opposed to across the world

It's not always about suitable land. Britain has very fertile soil but doesn't have the right climate to grow half of the products you find in Sainsbury's. So you are saying that Britian should stop eating bananas, avocado, soya, almonds, cashews.....the list goes on. Find me a weekly vegan diet that contains 3 meals a day, 7 days a week and uses only plants and grains that can be grown in Europe (let alone the UK) and in the quantity needed to feed the entire continent! I had a quick look at a few vegan recipee sites. Nice recipees, all of them use tropical ingredients though, so that would need a major over haul.

The western world diet has developed to be almost completly reliant on the luxury of imported food. Let's just say if all imports ceased from tomorrow, you would struggle to maintain a vegan diet, you could do it I'm sure, but I can bet you would be lacking in a lot of vitamins and nutrients.

One almond needs 4 litres of water to grow. 100 almonds makes 1 litre of almond milk. So that's 400 litres of water used to make one litre of almond milk. A cow uses 3 litres of water to make a litre of milk!

Several sources I've looked at suggest that almond milk contains as little as 2% almonds per litre, which would equate to somewhere in the region of 20g of almonds (if you ballpark from the weight of water - 1 litre being equal to 1 kilo). I'd be very surprised if 20g of almonds = 100 almonds.

Your water figure for cows' milk seems off. According to the International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD), the water footprint for just a glass of milk is 200 litres of water (I'm guessing that a glass is approx 250 ml). So if your water figure for the production of a litre of almond milk is correct, it would still be around half the water required to produce a litre of dairy milk.

www.ifad.org/topic/facts_figures/overview

It takes between 100-200x more water to produce a pound of beef than a pound of plant food. I'm not saying that a vegan diet doesn't use a lot of water, of course it does, it just uses less overall than an omni one. A vegan diet compared to an omni one produces half as much CO2, and uses 1/11th the amount of fossil fuels, 1/13th the amount of water and 1/18th the amount of land. You only need 1/6th of an acre of land to feed one vegan person for one year, for a vegetarian person you need 3 times more land, for a person that eats high amounts of meat, dairy and eggs you need 18 times as much land.

Spain and Portugal grow Avocados. Belgium, Germany, Netherlands, France and Spain grow bananas. Ukraine grows soy. Spain and Italy grow almonds. I don't think we have a big producer of cashews, but then again I've never eaten one in my life so I'm sure we'll do OK. But even if we did have to transport food across the globe (as we do already), we'll still be having a positive impact on our planet.

Britain could eat just what it grows. Our diet would be very different. Look at wartime rationing to get an idea.
Of course with no imports we would have no tea, coffee, sugar, very little wine, few spices, and items such as bananas would become expensive rarities.
I doubt this would ever happen unless Britain had no choice.

16 almonds equals 20g. Which means a litre of milk equals about 64 litres of water using dizzy's number. Well 65 if you include the water in the actual drink. Using fascicle's source a litre of milk requires 800 litres. So almond milk requires about 8% of the water dairy does...

According to the International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD), the water footprint for just a glass of milk is 200 litres of water

We would have no water left in the lake if this were true. I don't know where these figures are from but the average is about 3 litres per litre of milk. But according to that website tomatoes, potatoes, apples and coffee have bigger water footprints than milk. So what point are you making there?

I looked a recipee for almond milk. It takes far more than 20 almonds. If commercial almond milk only has 2% of almonds then I wonder what else it has in it!

Spain and Portugal grow Avocados. Belgium, Germany, Netherlands, France and Spain grow bananas. Ukraine grows soy. Spain and Italy grow almonds not in the quatity required for the whole continent. Like I said Avocados are seasonal. If they are managing avocados year round from spain and portugal alone, then I would be very suspicious about the farming methods!

Argue all you like but intensive agriculture is what gives you the wide range of choice foods from January to December. Intensive agriculture would need to switch produce to make up for dairy/meat deficit. This may be less harmful to the environment, but given the nature of intensive farming and the damage that crop farming currently does, that is highly unlikely.

I don't think importing food should be stopped, trade is a great thing, especially when managed carefully. I doubt the consumption of tea, coffee, spices or even exotic fruit would increase much with a vegan diet.

About 2.1% of green house gasses is due to shipping products.. How much of this is food, I'm not sure, but let's say all of it. We would have to be shipping food at almost 10x the amount we currently are to make a vegan diet pointless on the green house gas perspective.

I think we can see how that isn't going to happen. We are already transporting food across the globe. Even if we had to double how much food we transport by air, bringing food transportation to about 4.2% of all green house gas emissions, this is a great improvement to what animal agriculture and current food transportation is doing. (22.1% - 52.1% total.)

And remember that we don't need to add on extra possible green house gas emissions due to the increase of processing, packaging, and the domestic transport of this extra plant produce, because there isn't any extra! We're already doing that, just giving it to animals.

dizzy almond milk is mainly water, as are most of the milk substitutes. Cows milk is 87% water, apparently.

I don't know where these figures are from but the average is about 3 litres per litre of milk. But according to that website tomatoes, potatoes, apples and coffee have bigger water footprints than milk. So what point are you making there?

No, according to the IFAD link, all the items you mention have a lower footprint than milk, some considerably so, even if you adjust to achieve like for like weight comparisons. The figure for milk is quoted similarly across other sources (although I've also found even higher figures for it).

I think I understand why you are quoting 3 litres of water for a litre of milk. I've found that quoted as a drinking requirement for dairy cows. Water production figures factor in all water requirements for producing milk. You're not seriously trying to claim that the only water you need on your farm is drinking water for your animals?

I looked a recipee for almond milk. It takes far more than 20 almonds.

You can't criticise commercial production, and make assumptions about it, on the basis of a recipe you've found for homemade almond milk.

You can't criticise commercial production, and make assumptions about it

No but I was told by a nurse to avoid alternative milks due to the untested health risks. There is lots of information out there and a lot of things in these "milks" that you probably shouldn't consume on a daily/weekly basis. Artificial sweetners for example.

Here's some facts
Soy Milk: 4 million hectares of forests are destroyed every year for soy foods. (foods not cattle food).
Rice Milk: Rice growing is responisible for 1.5 per cent of the world's greenhouse gas emissions and takes 1000-3000 litres of water to produce one kg of rice
Almond Milk: California produces 80% of the worlds almonds and is suffering from severe draught. farmers have been drilling into the ground to tap into aquifers. California uses 60 per cent of the US's managed honeybees to pollinate the almond trees, but up to 25 per cent are dying from the pesticides. Honeybees are endangered and that's not going to get better with mass almond production.
Dairy Milk: The dairy industry contributes about 3 per cent to global greenhouse gas emissions but organic methods can cut this by 35% .

The best alternative is coconut but it is not a good idea to drink a lot of that, it's too rich in large quantities. So I pick my own organic cows milk. It works for me, everyone else makes their own decision about their best option to lower their carbon footprint. Assuming that a vegan diet is a one glove fits all best solution is not always correct.

I go for Oatly oat milk, it doesn't have any artificial sweeteners.

I don't know why you're posting that? Yes, all food has a carbon footprint, and uses water, and uses space. Rice is a staple carbohydrate for a large proportion of the worlds population, of course it contributes to green house gas emissions? Less than meat though.

Soy requires space. Cattle ranching is responsible for 4/5ths of Amazon deforestation. I have to wonder if 'foods, not cattle foods' was found on your source or if you added that on yourself, because currently 97% of soy production is used to feed animals.

I'm not sure the 16 almonds blended into water has many health risks, but you do whatever you want.

Oh, and California's most water intensive crop is alfalfa. Which is, are you ready for a shock, exclusively used to feed livestock.

And dairy milk has been linked to prostate and overian cancer, diabetes and high cholesterol. The casein increasing you chance of developing cancer when exposed to a carcinogen. I'm not going to worry about water and a little nuts/grain. Linked a graph about alfalfa.

Exclusively drink soy milk here. It's sweetened with apple juice. Don't claim to have checked them all but I don't recall seeing a milk alternative that was sweetened with artificial sweeteners, I can't see that selling well given the market.

No way would I drink soy milk. It's not healthy.
I lived in SE Asia where a lot of soya is consumed, but always fermented. Unfermented soya contains endocrine disrupters.